Moe Lane

Well. How reassuring.

LOS ANGELES, Jan. 13 (Xinhua) — Three men were accused in an alleged conspiracy to illegally export nuclear technology to Iran, federal prosecutors said on Wednesday.

The three suspects, a Los Angeles resident and two Iranians, violated trade sanctions imposed on Iran, according to the U.S. Attorney’s Office.

[snip]

An indictment returned by a federal grand jury in Los Angeles on Dec. 30 charges Jiraiir Avanessian, 56, a Los Angeles resident, and Farhoud Masoumian, 42, of Tehran, with multiple violations of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) and the Iranian trade embargo, including smuggling, money laundering and other crimes.

[snip]

A third man, Amirhossein Sairafi of Iran, was charged on Jan. 4 in a criminal complaint filed in U.S. District Court in downtown Los Angeles for his alleged role in the scheme.

This is technically via Hot Air Headlines, but the LA Times article that it linked to somehow managed to obscure critical details.  It’s a hell of a thing when the press arm of the freaking People’s Republic of China gives you better basic information than a major American newspaper…

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

(H/T: Hot Air) It’s bad when you have somebody from this administration wincing at a proposed foreign relations move:

Sen. John Kerry has suggested becoming the first high-level U.S. emissary to make a public visit to Tehran since the 1979 Islamic revolution, a move White House officials say they won’t oppose.

“…say they won’t oppose.” How… bloodless… a response. And how quick the administration was to remind the world that as head of the Foreign Relations Committee* the movements of Senator Kerry is beyond the White House’s control. It was all his idea, in fact.  A complete surprise:

The Obama administration hasn’t decided whether to make Sen. Kerry its official representative if he goes, but as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Sen. Kerry can visit if the White House and Tehran both approve.

Many opponents of Tehran’s regime oppose such a visit, fearing it would lend legitimacy to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at a time when his government is under continuing pressure from protests and opposition figures. Hundreds of thousands of demonstrators took to the streets again this week to voice their opposition to the government following the death of a reformist cleric.

That Kerry’s timing this olive branch to the Iranian ruling regime just when street protests bubbled over is merely a sign that the Senator is watched over by a spirit possessed of vast cunning and political strategic genius.

Who hates Senator Kerry.

Moe Lane

*Yes. I know. They made John Kerry head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES, PEOPLE.

Crossposted to RedState.

This is an epic-level paragraph on the problems with getting Iran to negotiate about its nuclear program in good faith:

“It’s like playing chess with a monkey,” said one diplomat close to the talks. “You get them to checkmate, and then they swallow the king.”

That had to have been a Brit making that statement, by the way. No American would dare.

Via Hot Air Headlines.

Note the plural: while this Boston Globe article primarily references one organization (Iran Human Rights Documentation Center)…

For the past five years, researchers in a modest office overlooking the New Haven green have carefully documented cases of assassination and torture of democracy activists in Iran. With more than $3 million in grants from the US State Department, they have pored over thousands of documents and Persian-language press reports and interviewed scores of witnesses and survivors to build dossiers on those they say are Iran’s most infamous human-rights abusers.

But just as the Iran Human Rights Documentation Center was ramping up to investigate abuses of protesters after this summer’s disputed presidential election, the group received word that – for the first time since it was formed – its federal funding request had been denied.

…it goes on to note that there are reports that more Iranian human rights groups have been defunded by an administration looking for a less… confrontational… relationship with the current Iranian regime.  This is more the White House’s speed:

The Obama administration has emphasized other forms of assistance, such as aid for software programs that help activists communicate on the Internet anonymously. It also has continued funding for exchange programs. In the coming months, for instance, the administration hopes to bring Iranian lawyers to major cities in the United States, including Boston, to talk with American lawyers about their concept of law.

The current Iranian regime’s ‘concept of law’ permits punishing homosexuality with death and excuses the rape of protesters.  I fail to see why we need to hear their excuses for that.

(H/T: Hot Air)

Moe Lane

PS: Note, though, that we had money enough to try to get the Olympics for the Daley Machine.

PPS: In case it isn’t obvious: now would be a good time for the administration to start in motion the process where all of this becomes a regrettable misunderstanding that obviously does not reflect a change in American foreign policy with regards to Iran.

Crossposted to RedState.

As in, trying to incite the populace against a long-established demon figure.

Iran arrests UK embassy staff

The British government is “deeply concerned” at the arrest and detention of British Embassy employees in Tehran, the foreign secretary said today.

David Miliband said Britain had protested to the Iranian authorities about the arrests made on Saturday.

He described the detentions as “harassment and intimidation of a kind that is quite unacceptable”. He added: “We want to see (them) released unharmed.”

Iranian media reported today that authorities had detained eight employees of the British Embassy in Tehran for an alleged role in postelection protests, signaling a hardening of Iran’s stance toward the west.

No, it’s not always about us. (more…)

Great idea.

(Via Hot Air)

Great idea.

Moe Lane

PS: See also Gateway Pundit, who has a good deal more in the way of video footage and on-site reporting.

Crossposted to RedState.

Gird your loins.

Question: What do these two stories have in common?

Iran Unrest Reveals Split In U.S. on Its Role Abroad

[snip]

Obama’s approach to Iran, including his assertion that the unrest there represents a debate among Iranians unrelated to the United States, is an acknowledgment that a U.S. president’s words have a limited ability to alter foreign events in real time and could do more harm than good. But privately Obama advisers are crediting his Cairo speech for inspiring the protesters, especially the young ones, who are now posing the most direct challenge to the republic’s Islamic authority in its 30-year history.

[Via The Campaign Spot]

US says hot dog diplomacy still on with Iran

WASHINGTON (AFP) — The United States said Monday its invitations were still standing for Iranian diplomats to attend July 4 celebrations at US embassies despite the crackdown on opposition supporters.

President Barack Obama’s administration said earlier this month it would invite Iran to US embassy barbecues for the national holiday for the first time since the two nations severed relations following the 1979 Islamic revolution.

[Via Weasel Zippers, via Hot Air]

Answer: Both demonstrate that the administration’s only real focus on any issue is its effect on domestic policy. (more…)

(Via, obviously, Fausta’s Blog) Mostly on Iran, and may I be proven wrong on all of it after tomorrow’s press conference. Just don’t ask me if I do anything more than hope.

I think that they’ve fixed the autoload problem on this.

(The book being referenced is You Can Do Anything, Daddy, which was MoeLane.com’s Book of the Week because I got it for Father’s Day.)

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Via Andrew Malcolm.

I don’t regret voting for this man.  Just to be clear about it.

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

This is not the Mob in Iran, awakened.

You can tell by the fact that the policemen are still alive at the end of the video. (more…)

It’s not just us who listen to our broadcasts, you know.

President Obama argued yesterday that there is little difference between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and challenger Mir-Hossein Mousavi on policies critical to the U.S.

“It’s important to understand that although there is amazing ferment taking place in Iran, that the difference between Ahmadinejad and Mousavi in terms of their actual policies may not be as great as has been advertised,” the president told CNBC.

Via @allahpundit.

(more…)

This is promising to become a thoroughly rotten day in international affairs. See also. And here, of course.

At this point, I got nothing to suggest. Except prayer, of course.

[UPDATE] Welcome, Instapundit readers. Not to be crass, but I’m doing a pledge drive. On the bright side, that link leads to the Riddler singing, so at least you’ll get your recommended daily dose of surrealism out of it.

Charles Krauthammer, a man who is apparently constitutionally incapable of suffering fools at all (and never mind ‘gladly’), waxed wroth on the implication that the President’s response to the ongoing Iranian crisis was in any way similar to Pope John Paul II’s response to the Solidarity strikers:

The president is also speaking in code. The Pope spoke in a code which was implicit and understood support for the forces of freedom.

The code the administration is using is implicit to support for this repressive, tyrannical regime.

We watched Gibbs say that what’s going on is vigorous debate. The shooting of eight demonstrators is not debate. The knocking of heads, bloodying of demonstrators by the Revolutionary Guards is not debate. The arbitrary arrest of journalists, political opposition, and students is not debate.

And to call it a debate and to use this neutral and denatured language is disgraceful.

(more…)

Twitter is down because it’s overdue for an hour’s worth of scheduled maintenance. They picked this time because it’s late night for Iran. It’ll be back up soon.

*Literary reference.

Crossposted to RedState.

Allahpundit has a post up about the White House’s sudden, if guarded escalation of its anti-election fraud in Iran rhetoric – I can’t imagine why we’re suddenly seeing that; can you? – and ended it with this question:

Exit question: How would Saddam be reacting to all this if he was still in charge in Iraq?

The answer to that is actually simple: he wouldn’t be, because this wouldn’t be happening. The people of Iran aren’t stupid; they wouldn’t even flirt with the idea of a civil war if they were still sharing a border with a genocidal, expansionist regime that killed at least 200K of their countrymen in the last war. Saddam Hussein used poison gas in that war, after all. Somebody that vile couldn’t be trusted not to leap on a distracted Iran and start rending.  ‘Course, that’s no longer a worry, given that we took the murdering tyrant out and hanged him a while back; not to mention, shooting down his sons in the street like the mad dogs that they were.  So now they share a border (for the moment) with the Great Satan, who everybody knows has precisely zero interest in invading them.

Gee.  Funny how things work out sometimes, huh?

Moe Lane

PS: Good job, whoever it was in the State Department that told Twitter to keep the lines open.

Crossposted to RedState.

@jaketapper

AP News alert FROM IRAN: AP photographer sees pro-government militia fire at opposition protesters, killing at least 1.

And if this is true:

@StopAhmadi (via AoSHQ)

The Basiji police that killed 4 ppl in Tehran got killed by the ppl! eye for an eye! #iranelection

…we’re now at the cusp of something. If the crowds start thinking that the militia are going to shoot at them anyway – well, they stop being ‘crowds,’ and become the Mob.

No, that is not good. The whole point of having a Velvet Revolution is to avoid waking up the Mob.

Moe Lane

PS: Jules Crittenden has put together a roundup of some of the reactions to the Iranian situation in general.

PPS: Via @magnolia_tree (her website, btw), these pictures. Whoa.

Crossposted to RedState.

First off, let’s avoid euphemism, particularly when it involves the Iranian regime: Dennis Ross does not have a ‘Jewish background.’ He is Jewish: Jewish mother; observant of the Conservative sect of Judaism; co-founded a synagogue.  And bless him for all of that, although the anti-Semites currently in control for Iran certainly wouldn’t; it’s hardly surprising that they don’t want him as envoy from the USA.  I just can’t for the life of me understand why the administration would care.

But apparently they do:

Ross Ousted as Iran Envoy
Dennis Ross, “who most recently served as a special State Department envoy to Iran, will abruptly be relieved of his duties,” sources told Haaretz.

I would like to believe that the reason for the abrupt removal has nothing to do with his book Myths, Illusions, and Peace, which suggests that it is a fallacy “that Iran’s leadership is immune from diplomatic and economic pressure.”  I would like to believe this, because if the reason does have something to with it we are faced with the prospect that the White House does not intend to do anything meaningful about Iran’s recent election fraud.  I do not consider that to be an optimal response to the problem, and would like to think that we were planning something smarter.

Note the repeated use of the term ‘would like to.’

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

Do you know what worries me about the current US response to the stolen Iranian election?

What worries me is that once we hear the official response, this (via @magnolia_tree):

Unfortunately, no focus group needs to be taken on one sad fact. America is to blame for this. The President and I would like to send our apologies to the Iranian people and government for our past action, which has led many to believe that this is how you react after a contested election. For those of you who don’t follow me, I have 3 words: Remember the Florida election!

Now I want to make one thing clear. All investigations after the fact showed that George W Bush was victorious. However, our actions during that recount were outrageous and set an example that the Iranian government is now following. I still have nightmares about watching the news from Florida as countless innocent people named Chad were hung. Night after night this took place while I watched in stunned silence at how we reacted to that election. I never knew Chad was such a popular name in Florida until then. So many of them were killed that the media even came up with a catch phrase for it, Hanging Chads. Disgusting. I never was able to track down one of their family members to express my condolences. It was as if they never existed. Scary indeed.

…won’t sound half bad.

I’d give the President’s response to this, but he was out golfing yesterday while Iranian thugs were beating people to death in the streets.  Unlike, say, his predecessor, he apparently wasn’t taking comments, either.  That being said, the administration is firmly on track to consider a plan to focus on a response to Iran’s reported human rights violations, which apparently excludes the concept of a ‘fair election.’  I suggest that people keep a good eye out for those who’ll reflexively endorse this decision as the received wisdom of the ages; it’ll be a helpful calibration.

Meanwhile: it’s clumsy and repetitive, but it’s real-time.

Crossposted to RedState.

While Jon Henke is correct – at this time the Carter Center remains completely silent regarding yesterday’s Iranian election fraud – the former President has made a statement on the topic.  One that is incompatible with any stance that considers what’s happening over there to be election fraud.

Carter said US policy would remain the same “because the same person will be there” in brief remarks after he met Palestinian officials in the Israeli-occupied West Bank.

[snip]

Carter — who was president during Iran’s 1979 revolution that toppled the US-backed shah and the hostage crisis that followed — said the strength of the opposition during the campaign may push Ahmadinejad to “modify” his policies.

“I think this election brought a lot of opposition to his policy in Iran and I am sure he will listen to this opposition and may modify (it).”

If by “modify” one means “crack down on, violently attack, isolate (along with the rest of Iran) from the rest of the universe, and place under house arrest.”  Which, knowing Carter, cannot be ruled out: he gets just a little less tolerant of people contradicting his narrative every year.

Moe Lane

PS: You can keep up with this situation here.

Crossposted to RedState.

Am I anticipating?

Yes.

Right Here Right Now, Jesus Jones

You gotta hope sometime, though.